Jump to content

Why on earth...


Recommended Posts

You can't short certain stocks even some indices. Get in touch with IG to know more about which one you can short or which one not.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, larrytradingltd said:

But that's the point, I'm not actually borrowing the stock with spreadbetting, I'm literally making a bet about whether the price goes up or down. That's why there's no level 2 and you dont have to worry about getting filled etc

 

True you're not borrowing the actual stock but on a cfd account (spread bet) you are looking to borrow the contracts instead so amounts to the same thing, if no one want's to lend them to you who can't get filled.

Link to comment

Sorry I might be wrong but I thought cfd and spreadbetting were two separate things? Speadbetting being simply betting on the price of something that IG pulls the direct data from. Hence the reason there's no need for level 2, you dont have to worry about ever not getting filled or sold and there's no need for stop limit orders? 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

Sorry I might be wrong but I thought cfd and spreadbetting were two separate things? Speadbetting being simply betting on the price of something that IG pulls the direct data from. Hence the reason there's no need for level 2, you dont have to worry about ever not getting filled or sold and there's no need for stop limit orders? 

Hi, no sb and cfd are the same but for taxation category purposes, the underlying market for both is the cfd market which the IG market tracks. If it was as you say it would beg the question who were you betting against? IG? IG are adamant they don't take the other side of client's bets and if they did and the regulator was to find out IG's long spell as a leading broker could be at an end. So their position is that they match trades in house and any over flow is hedged, so shorts may well turn out to be unborrowable.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment

I just mean that you are not actually buying and selling to another physical person, you are taking a 'bet' against whether the market goes up or down. So if everyone was correct on their positions then IG would lose money because when people get it wrong they make money, when people get it right they lose, right? Taking the position much more like a traditional bookies in that sense. 

Correct me if I'm wrong but it's that distinction that means it's a bit daft that you can't trade stocks because the shares are unborrowable, because IG doesn't own the shares to begin with. It tracks the market and you bet on it going up or down? 

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, larrytradingltd said:

I just mean that you are not actually buying and selling to another physical person, you are taking a 'bet' against whether the market goes up or down. So if everyone was correct on their positions then IG would lose money because when people get it wrong they make money, when people get it right they lose, right? Taking the position much more like a traditional bookies in that sense. 

Correct me if I'm wrong but it's that distinction that means it's a bit daft that you can't trade stocks because the shares are unborrowable, because IG doesn't own the shares to begin with. It tracks the market and you bet on it going up or down? 

you are confusing a broker with a bookie, a broker matches buyers to sellers, a bookie just takes the other side of your bet having given you 'odds'. 

If the broker can't find someone to swap contracts with you then they can't fill your order.

If the broker can't find someone to lend you stocks or contracts then they can't even start to look for someone to take your short order when you have nothing to sell.

IG have survived many major market upheavals precisely because they are not directly involve in taking bets. 

14 minutes ago, larrytradingltd said:

Also I don't suppose you know what the s&p500 is tracking after hours? Was expecting it to be closed till Monday 

Brokers use the futures market to give out of hours prices.

If you are looking for a broker that operates in a loosely regulated region and does take the other side of your bets I can recommend Plus 500 who nearly went bust just recently and had to issue urgent profits warning to their share holders due to clients 'getting it right' on recent bets during the covid and oil market upheavals. Good luck. 

 

 

Link to comment

Sorry I think you're missing what I'm saying. IG isn't purchasing the actual stocks from an exchange, it's purchasing the data and then you are putting money on whether that price goes up or down. Therefore they do not need to find anyone to swap contracts with and the deals that go on with all cfd and spreadbetting accounts dont have any effect on price action as they dont effect liquidity at all.  

I'm not calling into question how IG operates, I dont have a problem with that at all, just trying to clear up the nature of spreadbetting. Although it is a little frustrating not being able to trade the main gainers of a day but I guess it is understandable from their point of view.

Link to comment

I'm not saying IG takes a position on the other side of the trade but they only make money when customers lose money, whereas a traditional broker wants all their customers to win on all their trades because they will stick around, continue trading and they make their money off the commissions. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

I suspect it's for this reason that you can never trade any of the main gainers in the US market, there's always the error "Market only available to close" 

Which is IG protecting themselves against big losses from big volatile moves. 

Can you expand on this as I'm close to opening an account with IG and wasn't aware of this.

If a bio stock is up 30% on the day and I want to either buy it on a pullback or fade what I think the top is, the chances are I'll get an error message saying "Market only available to close" ?

Does it happen with big daily gainers all/most/some of the time? If so I won't bother and will just open a small SB account to take a punt now and again. Cheers. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

Sorry I think you're missing what I'm saying. IG isn't purchasing the actual stocks from an exchange, it's purchasing the data and then you are putting money on whether that price goes up or down

this doesn't make sense, you are saying IG is just taking the other side of your bet (who else could you possibly mean?), i've explained twice that is not how it works, IG match buyers to sellers.

1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

That's the reason you can always get filled on a spreadbetting account, you dont need to look at the level 2 to ensure you'll get filled, market liquidity doesn't matter and there's no need for stop limit orders at all... 

Or am I completely wrong?! (It's a possibility) 

yes, you are completely wrong, IG's spread bet and cfd track the underlying cfd market, if you place the SB chart next to the CFD chart they are exactly the same, same candles same prices, they move in the same way because they are the same. 

you are saying you should always get filled with SB but then can't understand why you didn't get filled with SB, the answer is likely to be a misunderstanding as to how SB works. it works the same as cfd, you need a buyer for every seller and if you don't get filled then obviously the broker is not just stepping in and automatically taking the other side of your bet.

loads of new traders say brokers are corrupt, brokers know retail mostly lose and so they just take the other side of the bet, but if ever the trader doesn't get a fill they blame the broker and expect them to just take the other side of the bet.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
7 minutes ago, Caseynotes said:

this doesn't make sense, you are saying IG is just taking the other side of your bet (who else could you possibly mean?), i've explained twice that is not how it works, IG match buyers to sellers.

yes, you are completely wrong, IG's spread bet and cfd track the underlying cfd market, if you place the SB chart next to the CFD chart they are exactly the same, same candles same prices, they move in the same way because they are the same. 

you are saying you should always get filled with SB but then can't understand why you didn't get filled with SB, the answer is likely to be a misunderstanding as to how SB works. it works the same as cfd, you need a buyer for every seller and if you don't get filled then obviously the broker is not just stepping in and automatically taking the other side of your bet.

loads of new traders say brokers are corrupt, brokers know retail mostly lose and so they just take the other side of the bet, but if ever the trader doesn't get a fill they blame the broker and expect them to just take the other side of the bet.

 

Sorry I think it's you that doesn't understand the concept of spreadbetting. Yes I know they track the same market, same candlesticks, price action etc. The difference being that you are not being linked to an exchange and actually purchasing a share of a stock from a seller. You are taking a 'bet' against which way the market will move. (Hence 'spreadbetting') Which is why you can always get filled on an order at any price, buying or selling, because you are not actually buying or selling a physical share from one of the many exchanges. 

 

My issue is not getting filled, I've always been filled obviously for the reasons I've listed, but the issue is IG not allowing you to trade many of the indemand us stocks, just saying "market only available to close" 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, HappilyNorth said:

Can you expand on this as I'm close to opening an account with IG and wasn't aware of this.

If a bio stock is up 30% on the day and I want to either buy it on a pullback or fade what I think the top is, the chances are I'll get an error message saying "Market only available to close" ?

Does it happen with big daily gainers all/most/some of the time? If so I won't bother and will just open a small SB account to take a punt now and again. Cheers. 

Yep, I've found this repeatedly on all of the top gappers. I don't think I've found one that I've been able to trade yet, which is pretty frustrating if that's your strategy. To be fair to IG I really like their platform and use it to trade mid/large caps and etfs but I've opened an Interactive Brokers account for the small cappers.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
16 minutes ago, Caseynotes said:

 i've explained twice that is not how it works, IG match buyers to sellers.

 

 

This isn't true, you are not actually buying or selling the stock in a spreadbetting account. It's why the level 2 is largely irrelevant and there is no need for stop limit orders. 

Link to comment
22 minutes ago, larrytradingltd said:

Yep, I've found this repeatedly on all of the top gappers. I don't think I've found one that I've been able to trade yet, which is pretty frustrating if that's your strategy. To be fair to IG I really like their platform and use it to trade mid/large caps and etfs but I've opened an Interactive Brokers account for the small cappers.  

Shame. Oh well. You would have thought IG would be big enough to manage volatility... I've given up trying to work brokers out. 

I haven't looked at IB for years. Last time I did I'm pretty sure I really liked their platform but UK traders couldn't open accounts with them. I'll take a look now. Thanks for the heads up.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

The difference being that you are not being linked to an exchange and actually purchasing a share of a stock from a seller.

neither SB nor CFD are linked to the exchange unless you are dealing through the DMA platform and even then you are still dealing through IG.

1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

You are taking a 'bet' against which way the market will move

you are taking a bet on a move in the market, someone must cover that bet, who? it can only be either another buyer/seller or IG.

1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

You are taking a 'bet' against which way the market will move. (Hence 'spreadbetting') Which is why you can always get filled on an order at any price, buying or selling, because you are not actually buying or selling a physical share from one of the many exchanges.

you can't get filled if no one takes the other side of the bet, WHO? it can only be an other trader or IG and as I've already said it's obviously not IG or you would have got your fill automatically.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

Yep, I've found this repeatedly on all of the top gappers. I don't think I've found one that I've been able to trade yet, which is pretty frustrating if that's your strategy. To be fair to IG I really like their platform and use it to trade mid/large caps and etfs but I've opened an Interactive Brokers account for the small cappers.  

sounds like you have been suckered in by that scammer ross cameron of warrior trading 🤕

Link to comment
1 hour ago, larrytradingltd said:

Yep, I've found this repeatedly on all of the top gappers. I don't think I've found one that I've been able to trade yet, which is pretty frustrating if that's your strategy. To be fair to IG I really like their platform and use it to trade mid/large caps and etfs but I've opened an Interactive Brokers account for the small cappers.  

trading US small cap gappers as per ross cameron, here's the thread, what a ******* disaster that was.

 

Link to comment
Guest MonkeyFlame

Just to add my 0.5c

when you take your position, as IG is not taking the other side, it has to place the same trade in the actual underlying market. 

so if you’re trying to short a hard to borrow small cap stock, IG would need to be able to obtain borrows of that stock for its own position. 
 

if you win, IGs position is covered by the market. If you lose, IGs position is covered by you. 
 

at least that’s how I thought it worked

Link to comment

Interesting conversation about HOW IG operate. I have to agree with Larry trading here. IG always say they do not take the other side of the bet. BUT the fact is when you trade with them you are absolutely not in the real market, your money stays with 'Bank of IG' - so far as I am concerned if you lose they win and vice-versa.

As Larry said you are placing a trade or a bet against the data feed that IG supply - that's it. There is no one on 'the other side' of your trade. The only time IG put it out to the real market is if their risk model requires that, i.e. everyone is taking one side, short or long. Again as Larry states we are NOT in the 'real market' we do not provide liquidity ! WHY should IG care about matching another client to the 'other side' of your retail trade ? They KNOW all retail traders lose anyway. If I place a 'long' trade on the DAX and lose when spread-betting, where is that loss going, WHERE EXACTLY ? It goes to IG, are you (Caseynotes) saying it goes to the other IG client taking an opposing trade, i.e. someone that went 'short' ? Bearing in mind 80% of retail traders at IG lose WHERE are all those losses going ? ANSWER: TO BANK OF IG. 

CaseyNotes says ' IG matches buyers to sellers' that's a nice 'theory' ...again all the money stays with IG as we, the spread bettors, are NOT in any real market at all. You mention CFD's above and how they correlate with SB but again CFDs are not the real market they (brokers) just copy (via data-feed) the cash and futures market. As you correctly say CFDs are taxable for the rest of Europe to trade with. 

I have not got a problem - like LarryBoy - about how IG operate, but as far as I am concerned Larry is right, all the trades when SB'ing stay with IG ONLY inc. all the trades / bets placed and monies stay with them. If you loose they win. End of. You can call that 'taking the other side of your trade' ... I personally do not, as it kind of implies that they are 'cheating' their Clients which they are not. Again they do not need to: ALL retail traders lose (80 - 90%). 

 

Link to comment

My interpretation (FWIW) is that a small number of winning clients get the money, and IG 'only' keeps the spreads.

But if 70 - 80% of clients are long on a market (say), and they turn out to be right (copper, recently) then I don't see how IG could stop from losing money unless it put some kind of real trade on or fund the losses from money made elsewhere (in an underlying market where most clients were wrong)

Edited by dmedin
Link to comment

you could try doing a search as the question has been answered on the forum probably about half a dozen times by IG.

As pointed out before, brokers who take the other side of the bet are at risk of going bust and do so routinely. Brokers who don't take the other side tend stay in business and keep their license, so given the longevity of IG as a company the later business model is the more likely.

IG gets prices from the big players in the market and pass them on to you with a widened spread, simple really.

They have an A-book and a B-book, essentially profitable and non-profitable traders. B-book has far more traders but they use far less size, A-book has fewer traders but they use far greater size. 

The business model is to match in-house shorts and longs as much as possible which is often matching A book to B book and IG takes the spread off both parties. Any over flow is parallel hedged which means IG taking the same position in the larger market, if you win so do they so they collect and pay you, if you lose so do they so they collect off you and pay whoever provided the hedge, but don't worry IG still turn a profit as they get far tighter spreads than they pass on to you.

Good brokers, bad brokers, take you pick. Bad brokers are cheaper but eventually get flushed when their clients suddenly 'get it right' during a market upheaval, clients might get their money who knows, clients of Iron FX certainly didn't.

Good brokers are never the cheapest but the business model they use is sustainable and so they tend to last. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • General Statistics

    • Total Topics
      18,582
    • Total Posts
      84,598
    • Total Members
      67,727
    • Most Online
      7,522
      10/06/21 10:53

    Newest Member
    back2black
    Joined 26/05/22 10:01
  • Posts

    • Look at various past recessions and you should notice that it WAS NOT the Economy that went down first. The markets went down first. The economy always lagged behind the market's demise. So, how is it that we are ALWAYS SURPRISED (most professionals in the business) ? Yes, the general public should be and is shocked, just like the politicians and the Mandarins. But the professionals too? Then how did they get to be called professionals at all, or be in that job?????? Fear is hyped up to DRAMATIC PROPORTIONS, The media will bombard us with dooms day scenarios, via their allies in industry. We have come across this time after time, time after time, after time. In fact during Brexit the same sort of tactic was used to confuse us all and put fear of getting out. Later we found that it was not like that at all. We face normal financial and economic dynamics based on HOW THE MARKET FORCES ACT OR REACT, OR FAIL TO ACT CORRECTLY, AND BAD GOVERNMENT POLICIES. Pundits offer governments "solutions", or do they really? All they offer is, with hindsight, plausible reasons and the same OLD "SOLUTIONS" THAT FAILED TO GENUINELY SOLVE PERMANENTLY THE PROBLEMS. Most have their pet theories as to how, QE, helicopter money, debt write offs for companies, subsidies, etc... USE THE SAME "solutions" as used in the past, repeating the same all, same all. Same all tactics, habits and practices, or is it malpractices? In the meantime how come the Central Bankers COULD NOT ANTICIPATE IT AND SOLVE IT? But wait! They have QE, INTEREST RATES and degradation of the currency (make our goods cheaper for abroad), that will fix it. DOES IT??? NOT REALLY. The reason for purchasing power of money going down over the decades is simply the inability to control or manage inflation / deflation dynamics and financial stability in the first place. There are BASIC FUNDAMENTALS  FOR FINANCIAL STABILITY THAT ARE RARELY CONSIDERED OR HANDLED. INSTEAD THE FOCUS IS ON INTEREST RATES AND SUBSIDIES AND A FEW OTHER FACTORS. We NEVER REALLY got out of the past recessions properly ---   JUST LOOK AT THE GDP GROWTH after each of the past several recessions and it has, on the whole, gotten to be less the next time round, overall. And the debts were not resolved by individuals. companies and others. Instead they were encouraged to feast on debts to get growth --- very low  interest rates   -- WOW, WHAT MAGIC. OUT WENT NATURAL ORGANIC GROWTH BASED ON MONEY PEOPLE HAVE FREE TO USE IN THEIR POCKETS. Artificial inducements seems to be the preferred way. No wonder things never solve fully and financial stress is maintained. Subsidies, write offs, QEs, laws passed to make individual bank accounts to be "taxed" above a certain limit to "help out" failing banks or when there is a run on the banks, that is a possible action in the future.  etc, etc, etc. Governments have been sold doggy ideas to steal individuals money  as a desperate measure to solve a calamity which THEY PUT OFF HANDLING FOR DECADES. It has been done in various countries in various ways in the past, e.g Cyprus 10% tax on accounts, and gold confiscations in some countries in the past, and  in several countries your cash that you carry in the pocket can be, and has been confiscated without doing any wrong because the laws passed after 9/11 allowed it so. The other way will be, in the future, banning paper money -- cash, and going digital. That will mean that full police state regarding financial control. Also, you then cannot take money out of the system. So if a bank run occurs, a big issue. And it will be great for negative interest rates charge. They have it worked out to save themselves after ruining the system themselves. Before 2007 the FED the then Chairman told many that booms and bust were over. Celebrate, bing on new debts. And so the malpractices  continued (afterall that is what gots encouraged). SO, IS A NEW RECESSION COMING? And what could it bring about? WHAT DO YOU THING?      
    • Charting the Markets: 26 May European indices pause following the Fed's rate hike. EUR/USD, EUR/GBP and USD/JPY drop post FOMC minutes. And gold price weakens, while oil stalls and natural gas heads higher.     This is here for you to catch up but if you have any ideas on markets or events you want us to relay to the TV team we’re more than happy to.
    • Under new powers, the UK government is investigating the recently acquired stake in BT by the private French telecoms business Altice. Last December Patrick Drahi’s Altice group raised its stake in BT from 12.1 to 18%. The UK government is asking if this move breaches the National Security and investment Act passed last year.              
×
×
  • Create New...